SHAMSUDHEEN Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner for quashing Crime No.70/03 registered by the 1st respondent and all further action taken in pursuance of the said crime.

(2.) After discussions at the Bar, the following facts emerge. The petitioner is the holder of a valid passport. He had gone abroad. He has returned from his place of employment abroad now. An application for issue of a passport to the petitioner, but in a different name, has been submitted to the passport authorities. The said application contains the photograph of the petitioner; but the name given is different. That application has allegedly been filed by the petitioner-1st accused in active association with the 2nd accused - a travel agent. The prosecution alleges that there was an attempt by the petitioner, the holder of a genuine passport, to secure one in a fake name for himself. It is the allegation that this attempt to secure a forged passport is made by the 1st and 2nd accused acting in collusion.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has absolutely no involvement in the application which is received by the authorities. He has not applied for any fresh passport in any fake name. The allegations are false. In these circumstances, further proceedings in pursuance of the crime registered may be quashed.